Australia's Piracy Crackdown Coming 'As Early As This Week': Three Strikes, Site Blocking On The Way

Get ready, Australia: pirating content in the great South Land is about to get much tougher, as the Federal Government considers implementing strict new anti-piracy measures "as early as this week" according to reports.

Fairfax is reporting that the Federal Government will implement anti-piracy measures "as early as this week".

The first is implementing controversial "three-strikes" provisions for offenders that would see copyright infringers given three warnings before potential litigation, charges and removal from an ISP is concerned.

As a result of the anti-piracy considerations, lobbying of the Federal Government by film studios and other interested parties is currently at its peak, with everyone trying to make sure that their interests are protected.

It would only be entrapment if the company was the one who uploaded the torrent first. They don't. They just connect their own peer to any existing illegal upload and log who is leeching/seeding on said illegal upload.

Edit: I should clarify; they log what IP addresses are seeding/leeching on an illegal download. There is precedent in the US to say that an IP address is not enough to identify any one person, but there hasn't been any cases for it in Australia yet so the proverbial jury is still out on this type of ruling.

Even if the company uploaded the torrent first, its not entrapment.
Entrapment would be the company forcing you to download the torrent.

Its like cops selling drugs and arresting those who buy them, not entrapment.
If the cops forced you to buy the drugs by way of threatening your life or something and then arresting you for it, that is entrapment.

cops selling drugs and then arresting you for buying it is pretty much textbook entrapment. At least in australia Judges dont allow that at all. Or at least they didnt in the 90s when I was working in the courts. Might have changed now.

"It would only be entrapment if the company was the one who uploaded the torrent first. They don't.".. actually, they have - in the past this was spotted when one division within the company found they had launched a lawsuit against another division within their own company for uploading content.

But this is all beside the point - under the law, free trade, etc, a 'pirate' was and still remains someone who profits from illegally selling material which they do not own. This is merely bureaucratic 'creep' where they've nudged the laws to suit themselves and called downloaders 'pirates'. A person who downloads a movie they didn't pay for is indistinguishable from someone who intentionally bought a pirate DVD .. or a person who was duped into buying a DVD that wasn't legitimate. As a consumer in the latter case, the 'pirate' is the one at fault.

this happened to me in uni. It was a huge fkn pain in the ass trying to prove innocence infront a board of ancient technophobes who only understand the concept of P2P as far as the media and pollies have explained to them

Luckily they asked a Computer science lecturer to be in the panel who Got it

Nice way of effectively removing free speech and the fact that the pirate bay in particular does not just have pirated material.

People Pirate for various reasons but the main ones are:
1. Access
2. Availability
3. Price
4. Format.

All this does is give more profit to the big GREEDY companies. Actors, Employees, Musicians, etc will not see more only the FAT cats.

Also this will cause them to increase prices not reduce.

Also laws will be changed to do with privacy. e.g. An isp is already monitoring network traffic for performance issues and can tell what ports most torrents run over and they can also check for multiple connection over the same port as this is how they usually work. this allows them to investigate further.

This government and this Governor General Need Sacking. We need someone in for the people, not there self interests and back pockets.

I love those people who think we don't have free speech merely because no legislation says we do. The important thing is that it does not say we don't and case law says we have implied freedom of speech. So we effectively do.

You appear to have misunderstood the role of the modern democratic capitalist government. Their purpose is not to help you, their purpose is to facilitate the money. Any benefit derived by the voting public is quite unintended unless it keeps the wheels of capitalism rolling.

Remember the document that slipped just prior to the election which mentioned all this going down and the subsequent shit-storm? When they were all "oh we didn't actually read the full document, that's not what we meant".

Anyway you slice it, once it's in, neither the LNP or ALP will attempt to remove it.

Are you forgetting that Conroy stepped back eventually after determining that blocking was a stupid plan and moved forward sensibly. They also had a much better plan than the current government for one of the primary public infrastructure services in this country. NBN.
They had lots of issues but a lot less than the current government.

In fact, it would be a good idea for someone to make temp ISPs - Everyone sign up for a year, download whatever using 'ISP #1'. Once the government inundates 'ISP #1' with legal crap, everyone switches to a new company 'ISP #2' and 'ISP #1' files for bankruptcy.

Your correct but the ISP wont be doing that as they will not be policing your downloads. its only the MPAA/RIAA's & their cronies that will be looking for people downloading in torrent swams.
Having said that i would still be using SFTP but the ISP wont be looking at your FTP download headers if you didn't use secure FTP

They do realise that Pirate bay and Torrent's aren't the only source to download from the internet ?
People will continue to find a way forever.

If they devoted their time to bringing us fairer streaming services and prices to match the rest of the world then they would be far more effective in the long run , I wish them luck in the fight against 80% of the Australian population.

* Introduce convoluted plans this week
* Movie studios cheer next week
* Movie distributors file for bankruptcy the week after as Australian's respond with just waiting of the DVD/BluRay to come out in America
* Those who invest in VPN solutions becoming multi-millionairs before a month is out.

Finally, piracy remains unchanged as like Conroy's Censorship Filter and similar schemes from the Howard era, these ideas do not address the cause of the problem.

What he said, plus I don't know of any vpn provider who gives theuser access to the "keys", plus they can't stop people from using a vpn provider plus a proxy provider, which you can do for under $10 a month for maximum security.

There are even VPN over TOR providers now.

The simple fact is that zero people have had their internet access disconnected as a result of 3 strikes laws around the world and Australia is not going to be the first.

But if you work for the government or you don't want your wife & kids scared by letters in the mail, get a VPN (or two) because under $100 a year is a small price to pay for what you are getting. Plus it let's you access the ABC overseas and protectsa you against hotel wifi hackers.

Only read a little bit about it, but some companies rent out sandboxes/seedboxes (can't remember what the name is exactly) and you download the movies to the S-box, and then from there you download it to your computer. Supposedly the government won't be looking for it somehow when you download it. I think it's because you can change the file names and whatever before the gov can see it before you send it to your comp. Like I said. I'm not really clued up on it but it looks like I'm going to have to do some research.
I wonder if they will take the pirate bay app from the playstore. As far as I'm concerned. If it's an app on my phone that I got from Google , then surely I'm allowed to use it. Why is it there then. ?

"pirating content in the great South Land is about to get much tougher"

No it isn't. Anybody who knows what they're doing can easily avoid these 'measures' to curb piracy, while anybody who doesn't know can find out how to with one damn Google search. Other countries have tried exactly these systems to curb piracy - New Zealand in the case of 3 Strikes and the UK for blocking the Pirate Bay. Neither the 3 Strikes rule, nor the website blocking did anything to stop piracy. They don't work - period. It just makes politicians and highly paid CEOs feel warm and fuzzy inside to think that they've made pirating a little bit harder, when in fact they've just made it more difficult for themselves to track pirates down.

Senator Brandis has warned that the government could legislate if a voluntary, industry-code of practice for ISPs isn't agreed. He has argued that ISPs ‘‘need to take some responsibility’’ for illegal downloading, because they ‘‘provide the facility which enables this to happen’’.

Under that same reasoning, Tim Shaw should be jailed for life because he has been selling products that can be used as instruments of murder for decades.

The ALP, which unsuccessfully sought a voluntary scheme while in government, said it would examine any policy proposal put forward. But it said there was no single solution and the government was yet to ‘‘put forward a coherent policy proposal’’.
.
‘‘Labor supports the freedom of internet users, while also recognising that the rights of artists and copyright holders need to be protected,’’ a spokeswoman for shadow attorney general Mark Dreyfus said.

"Labor supports the freedom of Internet users"? Don't treat us like idiots, we remember Steven Conroy so no, Labor does not support freedom. Labor is just as much for censorship as the next party.

told Fairfax Media that copyright infringement ‘‘hurts the creative community - it undermines investment, employment, business models and innovation.

So that's what stopping A Song of Ice and Fire from being made into a TV series..... What a minute....

Australians are among the biggest pirates per capita. Debate continues about whether this is driven by opportunism, the delays for overseas content to reach here, or an aversion to the country's higher prices.

Debate continues even though the conclusion as been around since the 1980s and earlier: we're being treated with contempt and are constantly being ripped off.

Justin Diddams, media analyst at Citi, said last week that the ‘‘increased volume of pirated content consumption is demand driven, more out of necessity’’ than ‘‘some deep ingrained convict desire to steal’’.

Considering those same convicts have been dead for nearly 200 years I think it's high time to move on rather that make that condescending remark!

ISP iiNet in 2012 won a four-year legal battle against 34 parties including Village Roadshow, Disney Enterprises and Dreamworks Films, relating to whether it was responsible for its users’ illegal downloads. The High Court ruled that iiNet had not authorised copyright infringements.

And basically told the MPAA (who support AFACT down here) that they are not an law unto themselves and they can get into the queue with everyone else.

‘‘There doesn’t seem to be any empirical evidence that either blocking websites or sending harsh notices to customers ... does anything to reduce the incidence of piracy. Show me the evidence,’’ Mr Dalby said.

There doesn't seem to be any evidence because it doesn't work hence there is no evidence.

Telco giant Telstra said it ‘‘continue[d] to stand willing to engage in constructive discussion with industry and government to help address online piracy through means which balance the interests of all stakeholders including our customers and shareholders.’’

Yeah, sure. Telstra has always cared about it's customers. And my father was a unicorn and I cry rainbows when I'm happy!

Fingers crossed this will go like SOPA and be dropped as it sets too many precedents that bleed into other areas. But given that both sides like the idea of censorship I'm not holding my breath.

Justin Diddams, media analyst at Citi, said last week that the ‘‘increased volume of pirated content consumption is demand driven, more out of necessity’’ than ‘‘some deep ingrained convict desire to steal’’.

If this comes to fruition. I can see a lot of people questioning their broadband plans. Would they really need that much data any more. Would they not just get a cheaper plan, and would not the ISP's begin to lose money. This is going to get interesting. Not to mention people swapping over to the dark net.

It depends on how they track you. IP address spoofing via a VPN or proxy will fool trackers, but your ISP would still be able to see you routing traffic through the VPN (though the actual usefulness of the metadata depends on the protocol and target download).
The good thing is, ISPs only tend to do as much as they're legally required to. Fooling trackers prevents third parties (ie. those likely to pressure ISPs) from seeing your real IP, and that's usually enough.

Except for the "Stealth" VPNs where the ISP cannot see you are routing all your traffic at all.
It looks like all the other SSL traffic and newer protocols have been invented that are totally transparent to any ISP logging.

Disgusting - What a colossal waste of tax dollars.
When is a federal ICAC going to get off the ground??
I would love to know who's pockets were lined with dollars to give Village Roadshow's agenda priority.

News Corp's interest is in Foxtel, which is probably the most vulnerable property in Australia to 'teh internets piracy'.

Village can whinge as much as they like, but they aren't in direct competition to pirated movies 90% of the time. On the other hand, if you were *really* trying, you could see them as substitute products - ie, you spend your time at home watching Game of Cards instead of spending $50 for 2 hours of Adam Sandler farting in coconuts and dropping them on a nun.

Actually, no. Foxtel would be fine under an NBN. It's Telstra that is threatened. Why do you think its then CEO Sol dragged his feet? Telstra has the monopoly on telecommunications here and the NBN would have put an end to the monopoly and symbiotically Telstra.

Murdoch has no control here. What people fail to see is News Corp is not controlling anything. It is simply cashing in on a situation.

If Labor was the likely winner of the 2013 election, the editors would have been in Labor's favour. And why? So people buy more issues: the same reasoning why there is so much smut in glossy magazines. Print what people want/agree with and you sell more issues.

I would love to know who's pockets were lined with dollars to give Village Roadshow's agenda priority.
The Liberal Party
Village Roadshow Limited Liberal Party of Australia $109500
http://www.abc.net.au/news/interactives/tables/aec-political-donations-table/

I know for a fact, the CEO and founder of Village Roadshow John Kirby, are big Labor supporters. Before the last election, they wined and dined the heavyweights and power brokers of the ALP. Village Roadshow also donate to the ALP. As a business, they try to curry favour with both sides.

I think the responses to this post is one long list of WHY these measures are going to be rolled out.
The only way to combat a socially acceptable degenerative activity is to clamp down hard, then dial back. First, make it annoying for those that do it. Second, punish repeat offenders. Thirdly, enable content providers with the ability to reduce restrictions on their own materials.
Currently, people pirating have a somewhat "Ned Kelly" thing going. They perceive their actions as justified given the "harshness" of the world in which they operate. Thing is, it didn't end well for ol' Ned, but the aftermath will see change. This is the first step in that change.

*edit
I can only assume I am getting voted down as people see my position in support of the current status. That is not the case. Just outlining that this step, though seen as archaic, are a step toward change which everyone seems to be wanting. These laws are the start of a process, not the end of it.

You say ...There is nothing stopping people entering the market
Then say ...they just need to negotiate with content creators a distribution deal

The second statement is the reason why the first is a fallacy.
This kind of statement is what NewsCorpse "journalists" (using the term loosely) fall back on ad nauseum.

Look at the history of the media. You telling me a mum and pop 'concerned citizen' is going to just open up a newspaper business and 'compete' with LimitedNews? With the amount of capital required and the regulations in place (to stop this from being viable)? No chance.

Any reasonable (non-murdoch) journalist, economist or reasonable person would see that this prospect is preposterous. Look at Ind Aus, they are regarded as 'loony' because they dare to tell the story for the 'other side' [to murdoch].

You actually highlight my point wonderfully.
It IS expensive to distribute this media.
It IS expensive to buy the rights.
To provide content in a way palatable to non-technical people in a timely manner is a HUGE undertaking - and business(es) are building/storing/serving it right now - for a cost that the majority of the market (again, think outside the small tech-savvy) will bare. Just look at FOXTEL earnings - they are still growing quarter-on-quarter thanks to new platforms (GO) and more configurable content options. Despite all the tech-site FOXTEL bashing, their user base still grows.
Don't get me wrong - any monopoly is bad. But money is needed to change that.
* Yes, I realise this makes me sound pro FOXTEL. I'm not. I don't subscribe to it and am not affiliated. I like to be informed on issues and it always is good to look at things from the other side.

You're completely ignorant of what it would cost to set up a viable online distribution service in Australia.

You would need multiple server banks in every major city, the space to store the content and then there is the cost of bandwidth for each server.
Thats just the cost of the infastructure, then there is the cost of actually licencing the content, which the licence holders probably wont agree to because it would make their current clients very unhappy (foxtel etc)
So lets pretend we have paid for all the infastructure and the content providers told Foxtel where to go and are instead giving us licences.
Now we have to actually pay a company to program a huge distribution service.

Im sure Im forgetting even more costs somewhere.

The only people who are capable of making online distribution viable in Australia are the very people who are lobbying for internet restrictions, restrictions that are not even viable.
People know how to circumnavigate any restrictions that want to implement, many of which are listed in the comments of this story.
China hasnt been able to stop people accessing content with their giant censorship program, and you think a so called "free" society will be able to?
Laughable.

Primary school kids have been circumnavigating government censors placed on the education network for years, and will continue to do so. Children ffs.

But legislation like this makes me want to start pirating to spit in the face of the corporations that push for this legislation and the rule makers who allow it through. It's a waste of resources and time and if you had the slightest grasp on how the internet works you'd know you're not going to stop it.

You see, the problem is, I DO know how the internet work. I not only use it, but I programme web-applications for a job and am the face of the people that get exploited by people who want to "stick it to the man", being a content creator.
You have assumed that a disparate opinion is one born from ignorance - and in fact, my stance is based purely on experience.

If they plan to introduce laws that suspend people's Internet access, I sure hope they never plan to introduce any government services that are solely accessed via the Internet. That could cause some problems.

- download tails(bootable OS) run tor
- seedbox's and ftps to home computer
- asain DVD imports boom
- HSM devices with private key installed in users house, another installed at piratefriendly country to mask packets being sent accross ISP network and reduce man in the middle issues
- torrents go to version 2 built around crypto network
- streaming of video from mirror sites to appear as watching a youtube video instead of going over torrent ports
the list goes on and on
KIM DOT COM for AUS PM
Tony can EADC

That sounds like a ridiculously complex solution, but each to their own.

Go your hardest.

A simple SOCKS5 torrent proxy would be enough to circumvent these measures (although please note this option (standalone) is often a lot more expensive than a VPN, and some VPN providers, such as proxy.sh or private internet access or nvpn.net will throw the SOCKS5 proxy in for free - these 3 providers I mentioned all have a $40 per year price point. EarthVPN also costs $40 a year and allows you to SSH to their gateways as well)

Also see: http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2014/03/five-best-vpn-service-providers-3/

Aah! you all missed the real reason.
In their own minds the gov thinks that 90% of the people that wanted the NBN, wanted it download porn and pirate movies. If they stop that practice, then we wont even need an NBN any more. We can all go back to dialup modems and be content.
I.T Businesses like mine which has staff all over the country wanting high speed communications in BOTH directions can go to hell or dream of a time when it will actually become possible/affordable :-(

They are already bypassed: people just need to buy seedbox or VPN access. These are working, existing solutions that aren't terribly expensive. It would be a mild annoyance for someone to need to use these services, but only a minor annoyance.

The funnier part is that Brandis has overlooked the fact that this has the potential to actually make life more difficult for the police. Right now there are numerous demands for data retention - i.e. logging of all the URLs/sites you visit and the ability of the police to access this data (probably without a warrant, since it is 'metadata').
However, if everyone is using VPN services then suddenly there isn't any metadata in Australia for the Australian police to use. The ISP logs: '1 very long connection to IP address w.x.y.z', and perhaps 'over which n megabytes were transferred'.

Hilarity will ensue when police start whining for the next futile intrusion into data.

Don't forget the games industry. Digital distribution of computer games has gone a long way to combat piracy.
And guess what? Both of these industries are still here and thriving! They didn't disappear when they adapted.

It's not the people at the top though, it's the middle men who won't allow online distribution in Australia because it will kill their business models. These people made a living purely by bringing international content to Australia when it was otherwise difficult to obtain, and less than two decades ago they were a necessity. Problem is that today we should be able to go right to the source and bypass them because it's not only possible, but in many cases a better quality product.

Only logged in users may vote for comments!

Get Permalink

Trending Stories Right Now

On February 10 2017, audiences around the world will be sitting down in cinemas to watch the much anticipated LEGO. Batman movie. 48 days later, Australians can do the same.
Village Roadshow is repeating history, making the same mistake it made with The LEGO Movie. A five million dollar mistake. A mistake co-CEO Graham Burke said the distributor would not be making again.
Everything is not awesome.

The next Commodore is a huge departure from the past 40 years of storied Holden sedans. It's based on the German-built Opel Insignia, and will be mostly offered in front-wheel drive with small, efficient petrol and diesel engines. You'll still be able to buy it as a sedan and wagon, but a lot has changed underneath its skin.